Spider-Man isn't still standing, since it all fell down long ago
Deadline interviewed screenwriter Noah Hawley, who penned one of the entries in the 1000th issue of Spider-Man, and while his tale may mention Mary Jane Watson, it's only in passing. First:
Undoubtedly, Spider-Man is having a moment. As Spider-Man: Brand New Day continues its record-breaking theatrical run, recently becoming the highest-grossing film in North American box office history, the Amazing Spider-Man #1000 is generating major demand of its own, with more than 400,000 orders ahead of its release today, and Marvel already moving to a second printing. (The issue also features a fortuitous interview between Tom Holland and Destin Daniel Cretton prior to the current accolades).It's kind of hard to appreciate a tale spotlighting Gwen when everything's been done to desecrate not just her dignity in J. Michael Straczynski's Sins Past storyline from 2004, but also MJ's, since the same tale made her look like a liar who'd kept a bizarre secret from Peter for many years. Back in the early 2000s, there were a number of stories from the majors that were either inconsistent with past continuity, or distorted it altogether, and Sins Past was but one of those. They may have seemingly jettisoned the Sins Past premise in the past several years, but their adamant refusal to restore the Spider-marriage still speaks volumes.
For “Still Standing,” Hawley teamed with artist Patrick Gleason to imagine a Peter Parker decades removed from the Spider-Man fans have long known. Now in his 80s and living at Forest Hills Nursing Home, Peter can feel the pull of the life he left behind, while his son and grandson offer reminders of the life he built beyond the mask. But as Peter looks back, one regret continues to haunt him: the death of Gwen Stacy. The story finds Peter confronting his memories and the possibility that they may not be as reliable as they once were. When a woman who appears to be an older Gwen Stacy enters his life, Peter is forced to confront the past in a story that carries the bittersweet weight of a hero reckoning with his own mortality.
And how is just 400,000 orders having a "moment"? If some previous landmark issues saw more than that, it's clear there's less enthusiasm now for Spidey. Especially if all they can offer up is yet another tale shoving Mary Jane out of the picture, and dredging up the Gwen issue ad nauseum. Come to think of it, after a few years, the writers had moved past the whole Gwen demise trauma in the Bronze Age, and it's not like it was repeatedly hauled out over the years in all instances, even if and when the clone developed by the Jackal turned up. If the orders see significant drops after the 1000th issue, that will only confirm all the more this isn't working out.
Also, interesting they cite a son and grandson...but no daughters? Apparently, even the future-era Mayday Parker isn't acceptable to them as a lady legacy now. That's the perception they're giving.
DEADLINE: Your story, I feel, belongs in the same vein of Jeph Loeb’s Spider-Man: Blue, in the sense that Peter is still reflecting on his relationship with Gwen Stacy. But the story also takes it one step further, as he still acknowledges his life with MJ, his own mortality in old age, his son who doesn’t pay much attention to him, and his grandson who indulges him… So, how did you parse what your story was going to be about? And what’s the emotionality you were trying to capture here?Somehow, this doesn't sound very encouraging, any more than any other shoddy story that's come about ever since Joe Quesada gave JMS the keys to the kingdom. Also note how, while MJ may be mentioned (here, it's solely as initials, from what I can tell), she's still very much out of the picture. That doesn't build confidence at all. Also, what dignity is to be found in elderly age when they've spent the past quarter century taking apart everything that made Spidey work in the first place, abused MJ as a character very badly, to the point where she has no agency, as the premise of her passing away long ago clarifies? Indeed, despite any stories where they may make it look to the contrary to date, they have otherwise kicked MJ's agency to the curb, mainly through denial of exploring a full relationship between her and Peter. And Gwen, for some reason, is made into an object for focusing on Peter as a miserable man, which seems to be the PC crowd's whole notion is the only way Spidey should ever be characterized - as a guy whose life is otherwise depressing. That kind of bizarre, controlling mindset is exactly what led to the dissolving of the Spider-marriage.
HAWLEY: I started with the issue number. Spider-Man #1000 makes Spider-Man an old man on some level, and there was something about that legacy where it’s like, well, let’s give him the dignity of old age. We’ve forced him to be this eternal youth for us on some level. And that’s where my head went to this idea that he’s passed on this legacy to his son, who then passed it on to his grandson. And all of us, even the maestros at a certain age, your kids are like, “Oh, Dad, it’s enough already with the old stories.” But the grandchild loves to hear the old stories. You know what I mean?[laughs].
DEADLINE: Right.
HAWLEY: So there was something about that dynamic between [his own living family, after MJ passed away]. Also, the story is about the idea that Peter can see the path from where he grew up to where he is now, yet the one thing in his life that still eats at him is Gwen’s death and how he feels he failed her. So, it’s a bit like Legion, in the sense that, when it starts, you meet a man; he’s in a psychiatric institution, he’s either mentally ill or he has superpowers, and we don’t know which one is true. He’s seeing things that aren’t there. He is hearing things that aren’t there.
In Spider-Man, you have a guy who’s in his 80s, and he’s in a nursing home, and is he getting dementia. Is something else happening to him? I think the audience would like to think of him as still sharp and that he’s just being manipulated. And then throwing in an older Mysterio into the mix—so many of these supervillains wear a mask all the time. Who would even know what Mysterio looks like? So that idea that there’s just somebody right next to him who’s preying on him, I thought that was a really insidious idea.
Oh, by the way, does that line about Mysterio suggest he's disguised himself as Gwen's lookalike? I think I know another reason why it's better to stay far away from this "landmark" issue. Spidey is definitely being manipulated, and it's been a sad staple ever since JMS became the writer, and even before, as the Clone Saga suggests.
DEADLINE: What was the most challenging aspect of putting this story together?What if it's the clone of Gwen originally written up by Gerry Conway around 1975? Or again, what if it's Mysterio? Or better still, who cares? Hawley's insulting intellects, and clearly doesn't have confidence in any history writeups, online or off, about Spidey, for people to know the backstories. On the other hand, interesting how he hints he realizes this looks more appealing to the speculator market, and is pretty much going along with it sans any discussion of whether there's merit to the tales inside.
HAWLEY: Well, again, it’s the economy, right? It’s how do we get these three big thoughts across? One is our Spider-Man is in his 80s. He has a son and a grandson, so that legacy continues. He’s in a nursing home. He meets [a person who presents themselves as] Gwen, but it can’t be because she’s dead. And even if it is issue #1000, you can never assume that people know the backstory. But I was told this run is already sold out before the debut, and they’re printing more copies. It’s going to be a keepsake item, so people who might not even know much about Spider-Man are buying it. So, part of the challenge was: how do you get in enough clarity for less-informed readers without it being boring?
And for the twist, for example, when Gwen is being attacked and Peter goes to her room, how do you make sure that what’s happening is clear for the reader? I can use all the words I want to describe it, but visually, you really want to make sure the reader is like, “I think it’s an attacker, but what’s going on?”
DEADLINE: Does it make you nervous that this is going out into the world with that much sales success surrounding it? 400,000 copies sold and then some… that’s no joke.Sorry, but while it may be higher than some sums today, it's still a joke. It's rare today for a pamphlet to sell over a million, and even then, there's telling clues it's only according to how much specialty stores order. And look at how the guy hints what he's really happy about is that his vision has been brought about, not whether anybody embraces it at the readership level.
HAWLEY: I feel good. You can never predict if anyone’s going to like a thing, but the vision that I had has been fully realized, and so that’s what matters the most.
DEADLINE: Do you have a hard-and-fast rule for adapting things to different mediums like this?I don't like how he keeps up the cliche of telling everybody the Phoenix Saga is "beloved". Because I don't find it appealing, if only because of how Chris Claremont exploited an established character I thought I was supposed to be rooting for, and originally turned her into a murderous maniac before the setup was retconned in 1985 to a cosmic entity taking Jean's place. And what's so "different" about a story where MJ continues to be marginalized?
HAWLEY: Look, my philosophy always, when I was doing Legion or Alien even, it’s like the danger with adaptation is that you take issues 120 through 130 of a comic book, like the beloved Dark Phoenix Saga, for example, and you turn it into a two-hour movie, and inevitably you have to compress some things and change some things, maybe consolidate some characters. Whatever you change will make people angry. I have a friend who worked on Star Trek who said, “Nobody hates Star Trek more than a Star Trek fan.” There is that idealism of, “All right, what you got?” But my thing was always, “Look, if I take the character of Legion, and I don’t try to tell you stories you already know, but I create new stories with characters you love, isn’t that a gift? Where you’re like, ‘I’m going to do something. I’m going to move past the ghost of Ripley and tell you an entirely new world-building story that has Xenomorphs in it, or I’m going to take you on a journey with Legion that will ultimately involve Professor X, but the story has to stand on its own two feet before he comes in.'”
And so that was my thought here with “Still Standing,” to offer people something different, something that maybe nobody else would. And they can like it or not. But I also felt like people are going to buy issue #1000 who maybe haven’t bought a comic book since they were 16, and now they’re 50. And so they’re thinking about getting old, and so here’s a story that feels relevant to them [laughs].
Hawley's also hinting at a double-standard on a story needing to stand on its own 2 feet when he implies he's virtue-signaling about having gotten his geriatric-themed story into print. Some of the older folks he alludes to could also quite possibly be those most alienated by 2007's One More Day, and that's the Spidey equivalent of any Trek tale that made sci-fi fans angry, if they were that badly written. What's the whole deal with angering fandoms instead of making them happy? No wonder the Spider-marriage continues to be trampled upon. There's nothing Hawley's offering here that's encouraging, that's for sure, and he predictably takes no critical stance on any of the worst stories ever published since 2001.
DEADLINE: Your version of Mysterio is a good example of that reflection in old age. He’s doing these things to Peter that are so hurtful, and eventually, he actually recognizes that.Oh, and here we get a fishy lecture about violence not solving problems. But isn't it supposed to be the problem? This is confusing and reeks of leftist propaganda. Although plenty of real life criminals are practically indoctrinated to where they consider themselves "victims", that completely obscures that comitting the worst acts like murder and rape do not make somebody a better person, and Hawley's not addressing that matter, yet hinting he even puts moral equivalence into the tale. In that case, is actor Gerard Depardieu to be literally excused for his sexual offenses of the past? How about Jimmy Savile? Absolutely not. And even if Mysterio only robbed banks in past stories, is that inherently okay? Of course not. Why reduce the whole matter of Spidey and his rogues gallery to one of mere "rivalry" as though it were all just a spat in the playground? Even eldery age is no excuse for this absurdity Mr. Hawley's brewed up. We're supposed to emphasize with a criminal? That's the whole problem here, because again, it risks letting the worst offenders off the hook.
HAWLEY: There’s a lot of regret going on here. Mysterio thinks that he’s finally getting his revenge in torturing Peter. He thinks it’s going to give him a sense of closure and pleasure, but it turns out that it really didn’t do either of those things. It was just mean. And I guess he’s looking at his endgame too, and he was like, “Well, maybe I’m not that guy anymore.” There’s something about the redemption of it all. I’ve created a lot of villains in my day, and I’m always looking for points of empathy for a viewer or reader because when you have a villain, it usually means violence is coming. And we’re trained, certainly in America, to believe that the only way to really resolve conflict is black hat versus white hat in the town square at noon. But I never want violence to feel like a good idea.
It’s like violence is problem-solving without an idea. And so when you build empathy, when you see, well, there’s no such thing as a villain. There are. Historically, there are some true psychopaths. But for the most part, you have people with grievances or people who feel wronged and who are trying, like a lot of people, to fill a hole they just can’t seem to fill, and they’re just bitter. And every time that Spider-Man takes them back to jail, they’re like, “See, I’m the victim.” Which is a very Fargo mentality for villains. It’s like, “I’m the victim.” So I guess I wanted to put these two old men in a room after the fighting was done and to go, not, “I’m sorry,” but maybe all that villainy was just a waste of time.
DEADLINE: Bloodborne and Elden Ring will never see me coming, that’s for sure. And last but not least, you mentioned Tom Holland earlier. This comic issue includes an interview with Destin Daniel Cretton and Tom about Spider-Man: Brand New Day, which is now one of the highest-grossing North American films of all time. What say you about its success?Considering optimism went out the window after Quesada became EIC, I'm not sure what the point is here. As for the movie, seriously, Peter and Mary Jane are married there? Wow, isn't that just so generous after all the trouble Quesada led to in a quarter century. It's interesting that what Straczynski wrote has since been archived in the Marvel Modern Era Collections, effectively differentiating it from what comes before. The DC Finest archives don't seem to have that kind of an early 2000s gap, which is a flaw by contrast.
HAWLEY: It comes back to the optimism of the character. It’s interesting because that story is about “everybody’s forgotten me, and I’m trying to be OK with that, but I’m lonely on some level.” And then it’s also clearly setting up some elements for the next Avengers movie. It’s a good time in the theater, which I think is what’s driving people to see it, especially at this scale, and Tom Holland is so likable, right? And not to [get into their business], but it’s also about who he is married to, and the year they’ve both been having. You want to see him and Zendaya together because it feels like a lived-in relationship on and off-screen. But either way, the movie delivers, and that’s the headline.
Even if Peter and MJ are married in the live action movie, that's unfortunately no substitute for the disaster the comics have long become, and Mr. Hawley's story from the 1000th issue sounds quite unappealing, right down to how Gwen's memory was decidedly drawn up very unnecessarily in a future age where Peter's an old man. So as I may have said before, there's no reason to celebrate this "milestone" issue when it's clear they're not interested in making Spider-fans happy. Serious publishers and writers do. As Hawley and company make clear, they're not. So to title a story "still standing" is meaningless.
Labels: bad editors, censorship issues, dreadful writers, golden calf of death, history, marvel comics, misogyny and racism, msm propaganda, politics, Spider-Man, violence, women of marvel


